mcsame is bushco redux. he’s a filthy war-monger who backed an immoral and illegal war, just like bushco. he’s for the tax cuts for the rich people, his drug-addict wife included. he’s against habeus corpus for detainees like bushco.

on the issues that matter, grampy mcsame is in lock-step with the criminal bushco administration. he has ZERO chance of winning in november…it’ll be a complete landslide.

so, keep on whining. you have the next 8 years of being the minority party, so you’ll have plenty of practice evangelizing regressive policies as this country moves forward.

Obama could have the voice of Luciano freaking Pavarotti and he will still be a disaster to this nation. What change? Change back to the good old days of Jimmy Carter and his malaise, misery index, and military-bashing? Better start looking for some platform shoes.

#37: “Vince, you’d better start believing, because Change is a-comin’!”

Obama must be infectious. All of his supporters believe that, like him, they can say one thing one day and then reverse it the next without anyone noticing him.

I hope you’re black, John, because that’s the only reason it works for Obama — the fact that white liberals cling to their racist belief that black people are too stupid and childlike to manipulate you and lie to you.

What a piece of work you are. I never said that Obama was a “change,” which means I couldn’t have “reversed” myself. And you apparently can’t find any quote that supports your earlier statement that “Obama said he wasn’t a typical South Side Chicago politician.”

You’re a funny guy, North Dallas Thirty. You just make it up as you go along, don’t you? It makes you a great Republican, anyway. And I suppose it makes you a great homosexual in Dallas, too. A lot of make-up must go along with that one, too. If you’re looking for a “liar,” you need to find a mirror somewhere. Wow!

Now you’ve reversed yourself and claimed that he isn’t, that no one ever said that he was, and so forth.

Thank you for demonstrating that Obama is a typical South Side Chicago politician, which means he’s corrupt, a liar, and a racist.

Are you really telling us that you have no idea how to start from this premise “he wasn’t a typical South Side Chicago politician” and work your way to his campaign’s main theme?

That’s pretty sad.

Obama never said he wasn’t a typical South Side Chicago politician. At least, I didn’t find the quote when I did a Google search. Maybe you can find the quote. When you do, please post a link here. Until then, it’s a stretch, even for a Republican, to accuse someone of “lying” about something he never mentioned.

Now you admit publicly that he is.

That means Obama is a liar.

Can you acknowledge that Obama lied when he said he wasn’t a typical South Side Chicago politician?

Or is it normal for Democrat politicians to lie?

Thank you for clearly illustrating the issue, rightiswrong. McCain’s policy inconsistencies was a POLARIZING issue during the primaries and has caused significant acrimony within the party–some Republicans are refusing to support him by pledging to stay home in November, and that is something McCain will have to deal with in his campaign, in addition to running against Obama.

This is in stark contrast to the Democrats’ approach which you have plainly conceded. Every few days Obama states a position that is diametrically opposed to an unequivocal position he took 24-48 hours earlier. And his recent decision to stab McCain in the back and waive federal financing is the most egregious of all since his whole candidacy was supposed to be something we had never seen before–the renunciation of corporate influence on elections; running a campaign that should stand or fall based on whether its idea connect with the people vs. who has a bigger advertising budget–OBAMA HAS CONCEDED THAT HE IS A SHAMELESS LIAR AND ALL THIS “NEW CAMPAIGN” TALK WAS BULLSHIT.

But here the real point: your reaction? Ehhh. Old story…next! The fact that you call what Obama did “the right thing” just proves that the Democratic Party has no principles, its candidates have no core values (except ambition), and that you are one of the ignorant fools they have managed to sucker.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6LtKDwVo-o

Right again, Vinnie P. Since Bill Clinton’s impeachment, it has been crystal clear that for conservatives, it is the future and safety of our nation that is at stake. For Democrats, it’s some lefty-elitist’s political career.

Yes, change. John we are all well aware that “change is a-comin’”. We are just troubled with the fact that: (1) 99% of Obama’s supporters are too blind and ignorant to even articulate what that “change” will entail; and (2) if they do know what the “change” will consist of, they are keeping it a secret before the election because they know that if they started describing it to the American people, their agenda would be exposed as pure, unadulterated socialism.

P.S. Was that reference to change “a-comin’” your attempt at parodying a negro spiritual or something? Are you black? If not, I find it highly inflammatory and at a minimum, racially insensitive. Do you make such references around your Obama-supporting comrade…er, friends? Because that is not the kind of humor that will be welcome in Obama’s “new America.” You’d better clean up your act or you’ll find yourself thrown under that but (believe it or not, there’s still some room–maybe Obama’s grandmother can save you a seat).

That’s funny, I thought I was unequivocal, but since you are clearly a wide-eyed, bewildered simpleton, please see below:

No, I do not base who I vote for on a candidate’s tone of voice. That is neither the practice of gay conservatives, nor conservatives in general. It is, however, among the five primary factors Democrats (read: anti-American leftists) use to choose which candidate they will vote for–

(1) Party affiliation (must be a Democrat)
(2) Tone of voice (fire, passion and music, preferably)
(3) Skin color (this factor clearly jumped several spots this election cycle; it wasn’t even in the top 50 for Democrats in 2004)
(4) Must avoid giving any details on policy positions until forced; then change policy to the opposite position within 24-72 hours
(5) Must say he is “committed to keeping America safe;” plans to start with immediate withdrawal from Iraq, since there are no terrorists there except the ones we “created”

There are, of course, other major factors in the top 10 for Democrats, i.e., candidate must say that he wants the election not to be about race–later must follow up by predicting that Republicans are going to run a racist campaign because the candidate is black–springs to mind. Otherwise, this is all Democrats need or want to pick a candidate (well, obviously).

So which factor was the deciding factor for you, John. Was it all that fire and music in Obama’s voice? Or was it that letter “D” (and in such an attractive font!) after his name that tipped the scales for you?